So - hold up - the ISTTF reported the internet's quite safe these days. So, what did these other two politicians do? They promoted free wire-tapping and forcing ISP's to keep permanent IP records of everyone. The consequences? IP records DON'T identify a person (go ahead google that phrase and see what you find). However, based on false information that is being presented to Congress - stop - go back - re-read "FALSE INFORMATION" - Congress must pass a law. Based on the presentation of the FBI to Congress that there is a risk of data loss if hard drives are given to defense, forensic experts, Congress must pass a law. Where's the "two-sides," to these arguments? Where's the Constitutionality? Well.. on that matter... I digress. Because, what's important here is evidence that "intelligence" sources have and ARE continuing to misrepresent data to Congress, falsely, and are causing laws to be irrationally initiated. So, where does the President/ex-Senator fit in? Mr. Obama claims his place of infamy in the "Protect Our Children First Act," which expanded upon the Adam Walsh Acts I & II, and further supported DHS' continuing removal of children from homes - even where children were never harmed, were quite safe and happy - and placing them into homes where they are lost, afraid and oft times are raped or abused (and in rare instances murdered).

In reply to this, others have argued that it is the responsibility of parents, not the government, to control what their kids' do. However, the fire marshall explained that the item that kills more kids per year than guns should not be made to look like a toy (irregardless of the toy grenades and semi-automatic police gear that looks real...). The fire marshall went on to explain that the ban will be intended to protect children whose parents are irresponsible...

Sounds fair in the bigger scheme of things, I suppose. Protect children from parents who don't bother to teach them about fire safety and just let them wildly run around starting fires.

But, why novelty lighters? If the kids' aren't taught the difference between right and wrong, it doesn't matter if it's a matchbook, a regular lighter or a lighter that looks like a car- they're going to play with it. But, did the novelty lighter makers design them with the intent to harm children? Obviously - no. Just some person with an entrepeneural spirit figured out a way to sell a .99 cent lighter for $4 bucks- and good for them!

When- not if - this law passes, the entrepeneurs will pay the price. The stores that already show the responsibility to only sell lighters to adults-will pay the price. Adults who purchase novelty lighters or collect them (as the fire marshall admitted to doing herself), will pay the price. But, that's not even the bad part.

You see, the parents who are responsible and teach their kids that because something looks fun, doesn't mean it is, will pay the price. Why? Water looks fun, doesn't it? Are we going to ban lakes and rivers? Several people, every year, die in the local lakes and rivers, ignoring the laws and not being skilled enough to swim!

What about driving? Cars look cool, don't they? but, do parents 'let' their children drive their cars before they are trained? For the most part, 99% don't. But, where do we draw the line between curiosity and accident? Where do we draw the line between neglect and sneakiness? Worse- when mom and dad are no longer the authority figures, how do children's fragile minds distinguish between following what their parents say and just doing whatever they want, believing the government has removed all of the obstacles?

Do we want our children hurt, I say, no! But a lego is a toy, and I have to teach my child not to swallow it. The plug outlet on the wall 'looks' like a toy to the mind of a child and I have to teach them not to touch it.

Is it a problem that the government can tell us, as adults, what WE get to enjoy and not enjoy? I'm sorry- no more drinking glasses with cute sayings because you're too irresponsible to teach your kids it's meaning!! Where does it end (because, now we know where it begins)? Did making toy guns look less real stop kids from liking them or using real guns? Maybe statistics say 'yes,' but I'm not a big believer in so-called 'statistics'.

When do we, as parents, stop worrying about our children's well being because uncle sam has us covered? Do we, as parents, have a right to raise our children the way we see fit (within obvious, appropriate boundaries)? Our we Constitutionally protected to be secure in our homes and families?

When do we have a right to tell the government, 'no,'? You see, this is the problem with our government- no representation. Either congress does as they please, or minority groups with the monetary backing fight to make themselves look important, not caring about the consequences of their actions.

But, hey, half the people on Obama's staff aren't being held accountable for breaking the law, so why should anyone in congress have to be? Our tax monies are going wherever the gvt. Chooses without our say-so, so why should they represent us anywhere else?

There it is, folks. The exemplification of Democracy's failure in America. The breakdown of moral standards and ethics. I wonder when the first court hearing will take place for the person who shows the gall to buy a novelty lighter... Or maybe decorates their own? I wonder when the laws will be expanded by the next minority group to ban bar-b-ques because they present a danger?

Remember, it's NOT about protecting our kids. We, as parents, work hard to protect our kids everyday, including protection from corrupted gvt officials and law enforcement. It's about the systematic decline of your individual rights, the long-term harm to your families and the effects on your children.

For those of you who still support this move, maybe you'd like to also encourage the minority group that tried to ban the pledge of allegiance from schools? Or, maybe you're glad that the boy scouts of America were punished for firing a scout leader who wanted to teach children about gay sex. Think they're different issues? Think again, because-

It's about control. Pure, totalitarian authority that otherwise ONLY existed under monarchies, communist regimes and the like. Heck, maybe tomorrow instead of oregon just banning 'books' from school (which they do, including American classics nationally accepted elsewhere), we can burn them, too? At least we'll have a use for all those left-over, novelty lighters....

*sigh* land of the free... Home, of the brave?